We Know How to Stop School Shootings


In the wake of a monstrous crime like a madman’s mass murder of defenseless women and children at the Newtown, Conn., elementary school, the nation’s attention is riveted on what could have been done to prevent such a massacre.

Luckily, some years ago, two famed economists, William Landes at the University of Chicago and John Lott at Yale, conducted a massive study of multiple victim public shootings in the United States between 1977 and 1995 to see how various legal changes affected their frequency and death toll.

Landes and Lott examined many of the very policies being proposed right now in response to the Connecticut massacre: waiting periods and background checks for guns, the death penalty and increased penalties for committing a crime with a gun.

None of these policies had any effect on the frequency of, or carnage from, multiple-victim shootings. (I note that they did not look at reforming our lax mental health laws, presumably because the ACLU is working to keep dangerous nuts on the street in all 50 states.)

Only one public policy has ever been shown to reduce the death rate from such crimes: concealed-carry laws.

Their study controlled for age, sex, race, unemployment, retirement, poverty rates, state population, murder arrest rates, violent crime rates, and on and on.

The effect of concealed-carry laws in deterring mass public shootings was even greater than the impact of such laws on the murder rate generally.

Someone planning to commit a single murder in a concealed-carry state only has to weigh the odds of one person being armed. But a criminal planning to commit murder in a public place has to worry that anyone in the entire area might have a gun.

You will notice that most multiple-victim shootings occur in “gun-free zones” — even within states that have concealed-carry laws: public schools, churches, Sikh temples, post offices, the movie theater where James Holmes committed mass murder, and the Portland, Ore., mall where a nut starting gunning down shoppers a few weeks ago.

Guns were banned in all these places. Mass killers may be crazy, but they’re not stupid.

If the deterrent effect of concealed-carry laws seems surprising to you, that’s because the media hide stories of armed citizens stopping mass shooters. At the Portland shooting, for example, no explanation was given for the amazing fact that the assailant managed to kill only two people in the mall during the busy Christmas season.

It turns out, concealed-carry-holder Nick Meli hadn’t noticed that the mall was a gun-free zone. He pointed his (otherwise legal) gun at the shooter as he paused to reload, and the next shot was the attempted mass murderer killing himself. (Meli aimed, but didn’t shoot, because there were bystanders behind the shooter.)

In a nonsense “study” going around the Internet right now, Mother Jones magazine claims to have produced its own study of all public shootings in the last 30 years and concludes: “In not a single case was the killing stopped by a civilian using a gun.”

This will come as a shock to people who know something about the subject.

The magazine reaches its conclusion by simply excluding all cases where an armed civilian stopped the shooter: They looked only at public shootings where four or more people were killed, i.e., the ones where the shooter wasn’t stopped.

If we care about reducing the number of people killed in mass shootings, shouldn’t we pay particular attention to the cases where the aspiring mass murderer was prevented from getting off more than a couple rounds?

It would be like testing the effectiveness of weed killers, but refusing to consider any cases where the weeds died.

In addition to the Portland mall case, here are a few more examples excluded by the Mother Jones’ methodology:

– Mayan Palace Theater, San Antonio, Texas, this week: Jesus Manuel Garcia shoots at a movie theater, a police car and bystanders from the nearby China Garden restaurant; as he enters the movie theater, guns blazing, an armed off-duty cop shoots Garcia four times, stopping the attack. Total dead: Zero.

– Winnemucca, Nev., 2008: Ernesto Villagomez opens fire in a crowded restaurant; concealed carry permit-holder shoots him dead. Total dead: Two. (I’m excluding the shooters’ deaths in these examples.)

– Appalachian School of Law, 2002: Crazed immigrant shoots the dean and a professor, then begins shooting students; as he goes for more ammunition, two armed students point their guns at him, allowing a third to tackle him. Total dead: Three.

– Santee, Calif., 2001: Student begins shooting his classmates — as well as the “trained campus supervisor”; an off-duty cop who happened to be bringing his daughter to school that day points his gun at the shooter, holding him until more police arrive. Total dead: Two.

– Pearl High School, Mississippi, 1997: After shooting several people at his high school, student heads for the junior high school; assistant principal Joel Myrick retrieves a .45 pistol from his car and points it at the gunman’s head, ending the murder spree. Total dead: Two.

– Edinboro, Pa., 1998: A student shoots up a junior high school dance being held at a restaurant; restaurant owner pulls out his shotgun and stops the gunman. Total dead: One.

By contrast, the shootings in gun-free zones invariably result in far higher casualty figures — Sikh temple, Oak Creek, Wis. (six dead); Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Va. (32 dead); Columbine High School, Columbine, Colo. (12 dead); Amish school, Lancaster County, Pa. (five little girls killed); public school, Craighead County, Ark. (five killed, including four little girls).

All these took place in gun-free zones, resulting in lots of people getting killed — and thereby warranting inclusion in the Mother Jones study.

If what we care about is saving the lives of innocent human beings by reducing the number of mass public shootings and the deaths they cause, only one policy has ever been shown to work: concealed-carry laws. On the other hand, if what we care about is self-indulgent grandstanding, and to hell with dozens of innocent children being murdered in cold blood, try the other policies.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

  • Mary Sue

    Common sense and careful analysis of statistics that don't fit with their purple-koolaid drinking ideology is foreign to the Left.

    • JacksonPearson

      For decades, Godless liberals have taken shots at God to get him removed from public life. When tragedy strikes, they wonder where he's at, or why he didn't stop it. They're getting exactly what they wished for!

    • Ranger-12

      The mind set of the people in charge of this country is that they want an answer to the problem that will fill about 1500 single space line of paper, not anything with common sense. I believe that people who are responsible should be allowed to carry guns, but the person who has mental health problem should not. the other major problem is we have leader who will run off at the mouth before they have the facts or they engage their brain; they say the first thing that pops into their head and most of the time it wrong.

      Lets look at this problem head on then set down with people who can figure out an answer that might work. you many not agree with me but there is not way we will ever stop mass killing in this country 1005 but we sure as hell can put a dent into it .

    • scum

      And yet the NRA sabotaged the CDC's attempt to initiate a large-scale study of gun violence. Methinks I know why……

      • Mary Sue

        Do you have any idea who's in charge of the CDC?

    • Hank

      I'm a Democrat, and I wholeheartedly agree with this article! Guess we all don't march step-lock like other political parties, do we.

  • objectivefactsmatter

    "It would be like testing the effectiveness of weed killers, but refusing to consider any cases where the weeds died."

    That's funny, but it's also the way leftists taught Islamic imperialists to lie for each other with studies that, well, lie. All the time, whenever needed. Hell, even 0'Bama the leftist Sunni Islamic imperialist uses this technique of removing all the facts inconvenient to his delusional visions for the future of the global socialist sharia movement.

  • Bella Jones

    I don't understand how a person carrying a gun can enter into school. Is this the only security we are providing to our children? There no other thing worse than getting killed because of someone's craziness.

    children activities in nyc

    • RobinClay

      He smashed a window and climbed in, that's how. The head approached him and was shot dead.

    • scum

      The NRA is calling for armed guards at every school in America. I expect that the TEA PARTY is planning a bake sale to pay for it……

      • Mary Sue

        I think you went to too many bake sales where they snuck in hash brownies.

      • Viet Vet

        The NRA plan is closer to being adopted.

  • crackerjack

    All US gun policies are a compleat failure, because they are based on a failed concept of human nature. The US 2 Amendment notion that all gun owners will act responsible is a myth, because not all do and never will. Not that this should suprise anyone. 10 000 firearms homicides a year speak for themselves.

    The idea of providing more firearms with less restriction is just doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different result s,which was Einsteins definition for insanity.

    • ApolloSpeaks

      Did all gunowners in the Framer's day act responsibly? No. Did they know that? Yes. Did they base the second amendment on this notion as crackerjack says? That's his myth and no one else's.

    • ApolloSpeaks

      Come to think of it the second amendment is based on the right understanding of the American character that most Americans are law abiding citizens and can be trusted to be responsible gunowners. Not so with socialist Europe and other countries that ban guns: Governments there lack that level of trust in the people.

      • Carbondioxide

        Do their founding documents relieve so many Europeans of self-government in favor of the ruling elites? Or did at some point the trusting people, democratically, unreservedly, pledge their lives, security, futures and fortunes solely to the charge of their governments in the name of solving economic problems or providing financial security? To me it is an interesting and puzzling development that the European Union was formed as a counterweight to US power. The US is regarded as barbaric in its application of the death penalty by some nations that remained neutral in WWll. Their ancestors suffered horribly and then enjoyed our nuclear umbrella, but it seems the bloody lessons of unrestrained government were lost on the descendents of the World War generations. I think their weak militariesand stunted economies stemming from their social policies are an increasing threat to the peace.

        • objectivefactsmatter

          "Their ancestors suffered horribly and then enjoyed our nuclear umbrella, but it seems the bloody lessons of unrestrained government were lost on the descendents of the World War generations."

          Just more victims of Soviet lies and their dupes.

    • ApolloSpeaks

      Come to think of it the Framers based the second amendment on their understanding of the American character. They rightly saw that Americans were morally responsible and law abiding enough to be trusted with gun ownership. Not so in countries that ban guns. Their governments don't have the same trust and confidence in their people. What does this say about the American people? There's none better on earth.

      BTW, crackerjack has an unAmerican European view of the American people.

      • Capt_Z1

        Caused by drinking to much kool aid

      • RobinClay

        The logic is erroneous. The Framers may have trusted the American people then, but would they trust them today? These rampage killings only occur because there are some Americans who should not be allowed out on the streets, never mind with guns.

        • RedWhiteAndJew

          The Founding Fathers not only trusted the people, they mistrusted those in power. That is why the Constitution is a document of negative rights.

          The culture may have changed, but people…human nature…have not. If anything, the descent into feral behavior, in certain quarters of our society, is even greater justification for the lawful bearing of arms.

          • scum

            No, the framers WERE in power, silly man. The 2nd Amendment was an outgrowth of the 2nd Constitutional Convention of 1787. The Brits were gone by then, bro.

          • RedWhiteAndJew

            Nothing you said is responsive to my post, scum. True lovers of liberty, when in possession of power, use it conservatively, and seek to ensure that future wielders of that power are restrained.

            "bro"

          • tagalog

            No, the Second Amendment is an outgrowth of about 700 years of English common law.

          • Mary Sue

            cool story, bro.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "The Founding Fathers not only trusted the people, they mistrusted those in power. That is why the Constitution is a document of negative rights. "

            Precisely. These stupid leftist arguments don't have any balance. It's just simple-minded attacking of people who they already disagreed with to use them as scapegoats.

            "The culture may have changed, but people…human nature…have not. If anything, the descent into feral behavior, in certain quarters of our society, is even greater justification for the lawful bearing of arms."

            This is probably the most important point anyone can make in discussing right to bear arms. It needs to be expanded and perhaps we really do need militias with squad weapons and training in a distributed force that can't be cornered or manipulated by 0'Bama or his brainless bots, or whatever tyrant later becomes inspired by 0'Bama's descent in to tyranny.

        • carrie

          The Founding Fathers probably didn't expect this country to become a haven for criminals that walk the streets unpunished, the epidemic of drugs,the multitudes of the mentally ill and the huge population .

        • objectivefactsmatter

          "The logic is erroneous. The Framers may have trusted the American people then, but would they trust them today?

          Inserting clauses again, like, "As long as the leftist leaders trust the American people…"

          "These rampage killings only occur because there are some Americans who should not be allowed out on the streets, never mind with guns."

          We can't lock up all the leftists just because of these shootings, as much as we'd like to. We need to try to reason with them until we have cause to prosecute. Come to think of it, there are some traitors that should have been locked up years ago, but that's been covered already in other conversations.

      • RedWhiteAndJew

        BTW, crackerjack has an unAmerican European view of the American people.

        Its spelling choices suggests it is, in fact, European.

        • scum

          Crackerjack is unAmerican because he was sickened by the slaughter of 26 innocents by unsecured guns that were legally purchased? Wow, we hardly knew ye, BlueJew.

          • RedWhiteAndJew

            Use of the term "un-American" connotes a certain opprobrium, which is ill-placed when discussing an individual who is not an American. To call a Uruguayan "un-American," would just be meaningless, unless there was some attribute to being a citizen of one of the American continents which the individual did not possess.

            I simply pointed out, scum, that crackerjack's unusual spelling patterns suggest it is European, or at least of European origin.

            But please, scum, point out where I used the "un-American" epithet, in anything other than a quote, to which I was responding, on this thread.

            As to your appeal to emotion of reason. Yawn. I am demonstrably more saddened by these murders than is crackerjack, for I do not use this horror as a platform for lies and denial of human rights. It is dancing on these children's graves, not me.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "Crackerjack is unAmerican because he was sickened by the slaughter of 26 innocents by unsecured guns that were legally purchased? Wow, we hardly knew ye, BlueJew."

            Did I ever express how much I appreciate you warning us about your character with your username? If not, it could be because I've spent all of my time wondering why you try so hard to live up to it. Wait…could it be that you're just a mere troll?

            I could say the exact same thing about Monsieur Jacque Craquelin. I hesitate though because I don't actually want to run you off. It's useful to riff off of the regular idi – otic statements made here by you and others like you.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "sickened by the slaughter of 26 innocents by unsecured guns that were legally purchased"

            No they weren't. The user took them illegally and without payment.

            Liar.

          • Mary Sue

            They weren't his guns. He didn't buy them. He stole them from his mother.

      • scum

        Did the Framers have assault rifles? I can't remember….

        • tagalog

          They had volley fire and the British square.

        • RedWhiteAndJew

          By the standard many of your fellow gun-grabbers use? Your partners in fascism have characterized any rifle used in an assault, as an assault rifle.

          By your own standards, the answer should be obvious.

          But you have trouble with the obvious, it seems. The answer is yes.

        • Mary Sue

          "assault rifle" is a meaningless term, nubcake.

    • http://southernrunner.blogspot.com loseyateefa

      Because all car and truck drivers will not act responsible (hence "accidents" occur) don't you think all those forms of transportation should be immediately banned as well? Just applying your logic. And didn't we try that logic with drugs? Aren't drugs illegal because we don't want them hurting anyone? Hmmm..hows that working for ya?

      • scum

        Don't be childish. The purpose of trucks is transportation, and the purpose of guns is death.
        Also, the drug laws have been bolstered by the Right, remember?

        • Mary Sue

          Because no criminal was EVER scared off by the mere THREAT of a gun! [/sarcasm]

          Oh wow, that was easy, plus it didn't require DEAAAAAAAAAAAAAATH!

    • JacksonPearson

      In Israel, every school teacher packs a weapon, or in fact, a fully auto assault rifle. Problem solved. Why?…Because it's a matter of survival, and not political correctness.

      • crackerjack

        Israel is at war. Gun ownership is highly restricted and supervised in Israel.

        • ApolloSpeaks

          Cracker

          With a large hostile Arab population gun control in Israel is a national necessity.

        • Capt_Z1

          Is "crackerjack" short for Idiot?

          • Mary Sue

            more like it's the long form. ;)

          • JacksonPearson

            He's one of those tiny plastic toys, that comes with the popcorn.

        • JacksonPearson

          Sure they are, and Israel have a right to sovereignty and to make their own laws.. The law of our land states, that everyone in the United States have a choice, and right to own and bear arms. When that choice and freedom is gone, then you're enslaved.

        • Lan Astaslem

          that's because all members of the IDF are armed, even when off duty, and you see them all over Israel. we hear about the terrorists attacks that are realized – not about the many others that are thwarted by the IDF or an armed civilian – you don't know jack, crack

      • Arlie

        There is a very good story on this very fact and the teachers in Israel carry holstered guns and the children are SAFE:
        http://www.newmax.com/Newsfront/newsmax-readers-teachers...

        "PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH"

    • patron

      You and David Korn are slowly transferring into a creature from the dark land of Mordor.

    • Rifleman

      Gun control is a failure, we already knew that. More gun control laws fits your own definition of insanity.

      There is no notion or presumption in the Second Amendment that all people, gun owners or not, will act responsibly. The presumption is that all people and governments will not, hence the enumeration of our right to effective self defense. The only myth regarding that is in your own head, crackerjack, nice strawman though, especially since it's socialists, not the founding fathers who operate under the assumption that human nature is malleable.

      Oh, and by the way, Shall issue concealed carry has dropped murder rates everywhere it has been tried. Your firearm phobia apparently prevents you from doing anything that actually works.

      • crackerjack

        This "concealed carry" notion is nonsense. Why should anyone risking a life sentence and a death penalty be deterred by the chance of a concealed gun?

        • RedWhiteAndJew

          You might as well ask why anyone would risk a life sentence or death penalty over a pair of shoes, or the change in someone's pocket.

          1) They don't believe they will get caught
          2) They anticipate that if they do get caught, they will get off with a light sentence
          3) They are too desperately lazy to contemplate flipping burgers in order to earn enough to get those hightops, and believe they are entitled to them because they are bigger and stronger than the current wearer of same.
          4) They are not thinking rationally because
          a) They are under a drug's influence (be it prescription or illegal)
          b) They are mentally deranged
          c) Thinking is just not their thing

          In short, those who do not fit the above profile, are deterred by the knowledge there may be a holster with a gun in it, in that handbag, pocket, or boot.

          For those who do fit the above profile, they are stopped when the gun comes out of the holster.

        • Rifleman

          Because one concealed handgun, one armed victim, can monkey wrench their intended murder spree. It’s no coincidence they almost always choose “gun-free zones”, and not police stations, firing ranges, hunting camps, or gun shows for their murder sprees. They’re evil or crazy, not stupid. Like the jihadis, they fear dying with a low body count, or completely ineffectively.

          The data clearly shows what’s happening, and the msm’s silence on it should be your first clue that they’ve checked it and it’s accurate. The msm/dp had all kinds of dire predictions about concealed carry that didn’t come true. Your inability to understand why, doesn’t change the facts.

        • trickyblain

          Look at Lanza. First sign of an armed cop, he offed himself.

        • objectivefactsmatter

          "This "concealed carry" notion is nonsense. "

          Only to you. But we expect that.

          "Why should anyone risking a life sentence and a death penalty be deterred by the chance of a concealed gun?"

          It doesn't matter how many because some are, and the rest are deterred when the bullets land.

        • Mary Sue

          well if they're not deterred, they're dead. Simple as that.

    • RedWhiteAndJew

      All US gun policies are a compleat failure, because they are based on a failed concept of human nature.

      Complete nonsense. The Second Amendment, beside acknowledging an inherent right of a free people to go armed (a right which predates the Constitution, btw), also states that an armed populace is necessary for a state to remain free. The Second Amendment is a crucible of unalloyed acceptance of human nature.

      • Mike

        I like your handle. Very clever!

      • crackerjack

        So my personal freedom is allegedly dependent on my accepting every nutcase and crackhead in town stockpiling arms and ammunition? Time to scrap the Second Amendment. Its self evident nonsense.

        • RedWhiteAndJew

          The crackhead, by definition, does not obey the law. Strike One.

          You obviously think that possession of guns and ammunition are prima facie evidence of being a nutcase, much like some think dark skin is prima facie evidence of low intelligence and overactive libido. Strike Two.

          Call to scrap the Amendment responsible for protecting all the rest. Strike Three.

          No balls.

          • crackerjack

            As a free individual and a free moral agent, I refuse to accept goverment laws that purpousely endager my family, myself and my society and will use all democratic means to have them scrapped.

            I view laws and regulations that allow every lunatic in my neighbourhood to stockpile arms as an inadmissible threat to my family and myself. And I'm sure I have the majority of US citizens on my side in this question. It's high time the Second Ammendment is either radically revised or compleatly scrapped. Now let's wait and see what the majority decides and then all obey the law.

          • RedWhiteAndJew

            As a free individual and a free moral agent, I refuse to accept goverment laws that purpousely(sic) endager my family, myself and my society and will use all democratic means to have them scrapped.

            Well, since such laws to not purposely endanger your life, or the lives of anyone else, save for those who would initiate unlawful force against you and your loved ones, I guess you can take a break, there.

            I view laws and regulations that allow every lunatic in my neighbourhood to stockpile arms as an inadmissible threat to my family and myself.

            As I said, you view anyone who collects firearms or has a supply of ammo as a "lunatic" or a "nutcase," by definition. There is a word for people like you. Bigot.

            And I'm sure I have the majority of US citizens on my side in this question.

            Then you are sure of a delusion. Even in a poll a few days after the Connecticut incident, a majority of the American people are against the banning of even "high capacity" magazines, much less guns.

            It's high time the Second Ammendment(sic) is either radically revised or compleatly(sic) scrapped.

            No.

            Now let's wait and see what the majority decides and then all obey the law.

            As I said, the majority have already spoken. As to all obeying the law, it's a pipe dream. That's why it is prudent and wise to own firearms.

          • Edward

            @CJ and RWaJ…thank you for an excellent and respectful debate of ideas. You both present strong views, and it is refreshing to see an exchange that didn't degrade into name calling or blatant personal attacks. I wish more discussions were like this. I too have concerns over the safety of my family, but I also worry about the impact of loss of freedoms on their future. The most difficult part of a democracy is the balance between freedom and consequences. There are no right answers, but I appreciate civil discourse and wanted to recognize both of you for it!

          • RedWhiteAndJew

            It appears you have missed quite a few of crackerjack's posts, then. I encourage you to review the thread histories. Crackerjacks posts are replete with insults, innuendo, hyperbole, and mischaracterizations.

            Crackerjack is a very creative speller, though!

          • crackerjack

            The majority has just voted in Obama whos agenda is certainly not NRA agenda. Right Wing positions have lost and are loosing ground, although we were made to believe that Tea-Partys, Evangelists and Neocons represented a comfortable majority.

            I firmly believe the NRA claim to a majority is a similar bubble that will burst as soon as someone has balls enough to get out a needle.

          • RedWhiteAndJew

            And yet Michigan, a state which went for the dogcatcher, is also a state which voted down two pro-union referendums.

            But thank you for demonstrating that for you, and mind-numbed obamabots like you, that this issue is partisan.

            I guess all conservatives, when told that dhimmicrap types like yourself respect the Constitution, can just laugh at the assertion for the lie that it is.

            Or maybe the world is a little more complicated than simpletons such as yourself, think it is.

          • http://southernrunner.blogspot.com loseyateefa

            Chicago already has the most restrictive gun laws in the nation and they are the murder capital. So banning guns only makes it easier (like shooting fish in a barrel) for the evil people to kill others. Do your homework cj. whereever guns are prevalent, the crime rate goes down. The crimminals always target places where guns are banned. The Aurora theater was prime example. the town's other theaters allowed guns…. You will never remove the evil from human nature, there will always be someone who wants to do harm. the only thing to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. You will never eliminate the bad guy with a gun from existing.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "As a free individual and a free moral agent, I refuse to accept goverment laws that purpousely endager my family, myself and my society and will use all democratic means to have them scrapped."

            Great. Reject them. As far as I know, you've already done that. So what? You have no authority to do more than reject them rhetorically. Noted.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "I view laws and regulations that allow every lunatic in my neighbourhood to stockpile arms as an inadmissible threat to my family and myself. "

            Guess what? You're one of the lunatics that law-abiding Americans need protection from.

            Did you vote for 0'Bama? See how dangerous and unstable you are, empowering a tyrant who wants to destroy and manipulate the US constitution and steal from Americans using contrived classes, including supposed racial identity?

            You're no immediate threat, but you're part of the cause and justification for the right to bear arms. Not many criminals will concede to this point.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "I view laws and regulations that allow every lunatic in my neighbourhood to stockpile arms as an inadmissible threat to my family and myself. And I'm sure I have the majority of US citizens on my side in this question."

            You have every right to move, as does every other law-abiding American that can afford to. But don't give us your "majority support" BS argument, because this is no pure democracy and you ought to know that. If you don't, it's useful to find this out about you. It's also not likely true about the alleged wide support you have, not that it matters much.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "It's high time the Second Ammendment is either radically revised or compleatly scrapped. Now let's wait and see what the majority decides and then all obey the law."

            That shipped sailed centuries ago, and your argument lost. Why not simply obey the law? Oh yes, you're a tyrant-worshiping troll.

          • Mary Sue

            you have lunatics in your neighborhood? Quick, get them committed! We need Lunatic Control, not gun control!

          • Mary Sue

            Guess what, Jack-on-crack. The laws that endanger MY family are the ones that restrict guns!

    • Mike

      But aren't most of those gun crimes are committed by criminal inner city thugs with illegal weapons. WOuld Obama send in the National Guard to confiscate the brothers arsenal? Think about it. COmpare the two cultures…"right wing whitey" and Hip hop thuggery. For years blacks have been butchering blacks with ilegal guns. Enslaving their own bros & sis with drugs. Pimping them out and setting a false standard of what behavior and attitudes cnstitute true "blackness". Liberal leftist hypocrits. Wring their hands over some radical few instances of mass killings involving whites with legally bought guns; and ignore the wholesale slaughter and loss of innocense in the black Communities.

      Please forgive spelling errors. I grew up in the public govermnment schools.

      • objectivefactsmatter

        "But aren't most of those gun crimes are committed by criminal inner city thugs with illegal weapons. WOuld Obama send in the National Guard to confiscate the brothers arsenal?"

        Are you kidding? Those demographics are typically Democrats. He's not interested in rocking that boat. He's interested in eliminating his impediments.

    • tagalog

      Who expects different results?

    • Western Canadian

      Crackheadjack is the same idiot who was lying about the US having an ‘arms related’ murder rate of 29.8 or so per 100,000 on at least one of yesterdays articles…. Why is anyone bothering with with this utter and complete moron??? His fabrications suggest he is either a troll, or an american hating (freedom hating) troll.

    • Ghostwriter

      And once more,crackerjack doesn't get it. I don't own a gun myself but I'm not going to stop a law abiding person from owning a gun if that person wants to. He just has to be expert on gun safety,that's all.

  • Caryn Lipson

    90% of school shootings are carried out by persons who are on or withdrawing from antidepressants. Antidepressants carry a black box warning for suicide by teens and young adults which should really be enlarged to account for adults and violence. See http://www.ssristories.com.

    • scum

      We can thank the wonderful medical establishment for that crisis, and especially the Right which rammed through the 'right' of Big Pharma to put shameful ads on TV.

      • objectivefactsmatter

        "We can thank the wonderful medical establishment for that crisis, and especially the Right which rammed through the 'right' of Big Pharma to put shameful ads on TV."

        Yes Mr. Troll. Whatever you say. If there's a problem with meds, it has to be those ads. We can't have that. Especially since the leftists indoctrinated most children to think that lying is permissible if it helps you achieve your aims. All would be well if we controlled advertising even more strictly, now that lying is as common as breathing…thanks to you and your buddies.

        In fact, now that the left has infected society to this degree, I guess we need to let them control us completely, for our own safety of course. Or we could fix root causes and get rid of absurd ideas like those you peddle.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      "90% of school shootings are carried out by persons who are on or withdrawing from antidepressants."

      Don't distract anyone from the leftist narrative.

      "Antidepressants carry a black box warning for suicide by teens and young adults which should really be enlarged to account for adults and violence. See http://www.ssristories.com."

      Timely reminder. Thanks.

  • κατεργάζομαι

    To paraphrase Mark Levin; "I would rather live where the citizens are armed to the teeth, than a country where only the government is armed." ~ America is racing toward the later.

    Thinking heads knew that Obama would seize the first opportunity to initiate his Gun Control agenda; its just that no one expected him to do so with such alacrity even before he was re-innagurated.

    Meanwhile the elected GOP Politicians do their "YESSIMS whatever yous say Mr. President, sir…." shuffle, as America Circles the Drain into the Cloward Piven Abyss.

    • jacob

      Venezuela is a country in which for a century, carrying or possessing a gun is prohibited by law,
      to the extent that law enforcement officials which for the nature of their functions must be armed
      are just EXEMPTED from the prohibition….
      And though, it exhibits under CHAVEZ, the highest rate or murders of the world, sometimes even
      exceeding 150 dead during any weekend and 98% killed with guns….
      And in Israel, there has been many terrorists attempts stopped by armed civilians….
      But in this last massacre, I put the blame squarely on the perpetrator's mother :
      SHE KNEW her son wasn't playing with a full deck….
      Then why in the hell did she keep guns home and worse yet, trained him to shoot ???

      • JacksonPearson

        The same question could be asked, as to why she allowed Adam Lanza a computer loaded with violent video games, or access to the Internet's RAP music, or, or, or, or….?

        • scum

          Because we support freedom, I suppose. The 'kid' was 20, was he not?

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "Because we support freedom, I suppose. The 'kid' was 20, was he not?"

            We? "We" excluding you, if we're to take you at your word.

      • κατεργάζομαι

        Jacob,
        Maybe we should simply cut off the trigger fingers of all those we believe to be insane people, nu? I know a religion that would be happy to cut off fingers….for FREE!

        Autopsy photos of Adam Lanza's mother's face are sound examples that she did not know the weapons in her home posed a threat to anyone.

        If we cannot implement a rational policy that flies in the face of our irrational human limitations, then there seems to be no hope.

        I propose we ban insanity!!!!!

        • κατεργάζομαι

          When President Obama infringes on the debate on gun control with specific gun control proposals, he should also be obligated to disclose his professional armed protection, 24/7, at taxpayers expense!

          • carrie

            What kind of protection would Obama and congress furnish themselves with if they had to live in Urban areas where your odds of being a crime victim are 9/10 ?

            Why aren't citizens supplied with the same protection with the $ the government takes from us and wastes ?

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "Why aren't citizens supplied with the same protection with the $ the government takes from us and wastes ?"

            They're the elites, trying to rewrite a lot more of the constitution than most people realize.

      • scum

        She was busy prepping for the end of the world, which is … OH MY GOD… TODAY!!! Meanwhile, her son deprived 26 souls of benefitting from ANY of the rights of the Constitution, because we're so busy protecting her right to have 4 unsecured guns in the house, and even though Adam himself had been denied a permit. Wow. Tanksalot, NRA.

        • objectivefactsmatter

          "She was busy prepping for the end of the world, which is … OH MY GOD… TODAY!!! "

          Hardy har, a joke about the poor persecuted Mayans. So you're a racist bigot on top of all that?

          "Meanwhile, her son deprived 26 souls of benefitting from ANY of the rights of the Constitution, because we're so busy protecting her right to have 4 unsecured guns in the house, and even though Adam himself had been denied a permit. "

          Yes, her son broke the law. You can't control everything you delusional freak.

        • objectivefactsmatter

          "Tanksalot, NRA."

          <rolling eyes at the delusional leftist troll>

          Go thank them in person. I hope to read about it.

    • κατεργάζομαι

      How then to react to reduce future tragedies?

      1) Never mention the name of the perp and certainly not any putative cause for which he committed the atrocity — as a matter of law.

      2) Remove the body of the perp and drop him in the ocean, uncovered by the press, unattended by officials and unaccompanied by any ceremony — as a matter of law. Just as we pay no attention to the contents of the toilet bowl after flushing, our press and government officials should be encouraged to move on quickly.

      3) Funerals should be private, not national events. The comfort offered by elected officials should be by a personal note, not by personal appearance.

      A Proper Response to the Massacre of Innocents Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/12/a_proper_r

    • scum

      Now you're talking silly, dude.

      • Mary Sue

        look in the mirror.

  • David R

    "Train up a child in the way he SHOULD go; even when he is old he will not depart from it." (Proverbs 22:6)

    Maybe there's a parent factor in all these senseless shootings? The state can't control everything regarding common-sense parental responsibilities…
    Maybe more violent video games producers should be sued, as well as Follywood with its destructive and violent agenda aimed at our youth?

    • jacob

      I agree…
      If lawyers can have the gall to sue gun manufacturers, people should be able to sue the
      manufacturers of these abominable video games……
      Other than kill, kill, kill, what else do children learn from them…??????

    • Questions

      Oh, really? And which filmmakers would you sue? Ridley Scott? Ron Howard? Steven Soderbergh? Woody Allen? And on what grounds? And what exactly is their "agenda," other than making a movie on time and under budget?

      The radical Right is every bit as contemptuous of liberty and rule of law as the radical Left. Their nanny state would be every bit as coercive. The targets would be different, but the mentality is the same.

  • ApolloSpeaks

    THE AMAZING INCREDIBLE RESPONSIBLE AMERICAN GUNOWNER

    It is estimated that American civilians own a staggering 300 million guns, 15 million short of the entire population. Yet, amazingly, with the millions of Americans armed with guns only 9200 died from gun violence last year, not a very large number by any rational measure. What this tells us about the American people and their "infamous deadly gun culture" is this: the vast, overwhelming majority of them are responsible enough, disciplined enough and law abiding enough to safely own guns. How many millions of gunowners get angry now and then, fly into rages at times, have murderous thoughts darkening their minds? And when they're in a passion and looking for a fight how many go berserk grab their guns and go shooting things up? How many cross the line of civility and morality into lawlessness and homicide? The number is infinitesimal. So small in fact that one three thousandths of one percent died from gun violence last year.

    continued

    • John

      Wow , Don't know the math exactly , but hard to pick apart the over all truth in the numbers even if there only off by a little …..

    • Mike

      I never read about Trolly Square. I'm surprised the "authorities" didn't file charges against the off duty officer. I bet this story didn't get national traction because the shooter was a Muslim. In Europe the PC press deliberately eschews stories that may shed negative light on Muslims bad behavior. Murder, gang rapist targeting western girls, riots, vandalism…all considered Jihad by the Islamic colonialist. All of it poo-poohed by leftist intelligensia.

      What can one do in the face of such determined liars? Reminds me of how the NAZIs kept the Jews under a fools hope…treating them politely in order to get them to follow the rules and walk off the cattle cars into the camps . The crisp young German officers when asked by the jewish woman, "Sir, they say we are to be gassed…" and he'd reply, "Madame?…do you think we are barbarians? Come, have a shower and then afterwards hot soup and bread!"

      • objectivefactsmatter

        "I never read about Trolly Square. I'm surprised the "authorities" didn't file charges against the off duty officer. I bet this story didn't get national traction because the shooter was a Muslim. "

        The mainstream media is so "Islamophobic." They're afraid to report the truth for fear of getting killed.

      • objectivefactsmatter

        "What can one do in the face of such determined liars? Reminds me of how the NAZIs kept the Jews under a fools hope…treating them politely in order to get them to follow the rules and walk off the cattle cars into the camps . The crisp young German officers when asked by the jewish woman, "Sir, they say we are to be gassed…" and he'd reply, "Madame?…do you think we are barbarians? Come, have a shower and then afterwards hot soup and bread!""

        The Muslim Brotherhood was allies with the Nazis and the Soviets at various times. The know how to lie, among other totalitarian political tools. OTOH, it's plausible that the Nazis and the Soviets learned all of their evil tricks from Mohammed's children.

    • scum

      And yet how many non-gun users have EVER shot anyone?

      • RedWhiteAndJew

        The real question is, what is the number of non-gun users who have killed anyone.

        Dead is dead. Carrying a gun with which you can defend yourself, gives you a much better chance of not ending up that way.

      • Viet Vet

        Cute twist, but no cigar, we're talking about gun-owners.

    • Viet Vet

      Criminology study has determined that 99% of all the guns in the country are never used in a crime in any given year. The CDC says that 74% of homicides are committed in the innercity. We have the scientific data, but it is never acted on, because the left is only interested in disarming the American citizenry. If crime suddenly went away, they wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

  • ApolloSpeaks

    But the crazy insane loco left says that this microscopic number is way too high; that it's an unacceptable epidemic of needless, avoidable, horrible death. They say that unless our level of gun violence is no greater than England's, Germany's or Japan's then we're immoral, irresponsible and uncivilized; a disgrace to the human race; an ugly city on a hill; a model and measure to no one. In short, we're a people morally damned whose only salvation is a gun ban.

    continued
    !

    • Jim

      Microscopic? Wake up to yourself idiot. Lets compare it to Australia, where we can still own guns, even if the USA gun nuts try to make it sound like we cant. 10,000 US deaths. 300,000,000 people. Australia 30 deaths and 23,000,000 people. So that means lets times australis population by 13 to reach the USA population. wow, 390 gun deaths versus 10,000.
      Microscopic?

      • Mary Sue

        heh, it's the anti-gun nuts that make it sound like you can't, too, and they go on about how there's no gun crime at all anymore or some crap.

  • ApolloSpeaks

    After 225 years of the second amendment we've flopped the test. The old Wild West is very much alive; and our gun rights are protected by an obsolete constitution of death. This is what passes for enlightened progressive thinking on the left. A shallow puddle of muddy water has more clarity and depth.

    • Guest

      During the time of the "Wild Wild West" – gun crime was still higher in New York City. Why? Density, baby. More people, more crime.

  • John

    Good points – and these aren't the only ones Anne could have made .

  • luckycuss

    The only law that needs to be passed is to outlaw "gun free zones" and arm every adult in the school system.

    • dmw

      Hmmmm. Come to think of it, Progressives seem to want not only "gun free zones", but Constitution free zones — very big ones.

    • Jim

      Yeah real smart. So when they miss someone they presume to be a shooter they kill a few kids.
      Fool.

      Hey lets arm everyone in cinemas too. Then when a gunman walks in in the dark and kills 5 people he can get shot, and then someone can shoot that person thinking they are then gunman, and someone can shoot them etc etc.

      Gun nuts have to start looking at fact. Not their little fantasy worlds.

      • Mary Sue

        because shooters shooting unimpeded is SO much better! [/sarcasm]

  • tagalog

    Coulter forgot to add the New Life Church shooting here in Colorado Springs, stopped by a police officer and church employee who was present and armed when the shooter arrived.

    Another way to attack the mass shootings by lunatics is to overturn the U.S. Supreme Court's holding in the Donaldson case, that ruled that the mentally ill cannot be involuntarily committed for short-term observation unless they're presently dangerous to self or others (how can you determine that a person is dangerous without observing them?). That would be a step in the right direction and would be less constitutionally intrusive than across-the-board gun bans, which restrict the Second Amendment for everyone.

    • Maxie

      The Left has lusted to ban ALL firearms since Day 1. It's at the very top of O's second term 'to-do' list. It has nothing to do with public safety and never has. It's all part of creating the Utopian fantasy of a Socialist heaven on earth. Our Narc!s$ist-in-Chief leading the fearful sheep to an earthly paradise.

      • Maxie

        The Left has lusted to ban ALL firearms since Day 1. It's at the very top of O's second term 'to-do' list. It has nothing to do with public safety and never has. It's all part of creating the Utopian fantasy of a $0ci!i$t heaven on earth. R Nar!!s$i$t-in-Chief leading the fearful sheep to an earthly paradise.

        • scum

          Sorry, WRONG………..

          • tagalog

            So, on the issue of banning all firearms, what is the leftist consensus?

          • Mary Sue

            unwrong.

    • scum

      And yet you support the right of Mrs. Lanza to have four high-powered guns, unsecured, in her household, when she has a dependent living there who himself was denied a permit? Astonishing really that you would promote the slaughter of 26 innocents….

      • tagalog

        Possibly you realize that there's a bit of a leap in your logic there. In fact it's more like a lacuna.

        But to address the non sequitur issue you raise: no, I don't support her owning unsecured firearms in her household when she has a son living there who is so disturbed that she is contemplating having him hospitalized. In fact, disturbed son or not, the firearms should have been secured from ANY user, with secured ammunition kept elsewhere, as the NRA advises.

  • Mike

    This is very interesting. But what good does the truth do? A majority of people will likely never read Miss Coulters piece. In fact, for years I've been reading conservatives trumpet facts that contradict liberal media narratives…but NOTHING ever changes. The deceptive practices go on and on. And after President Obama's election it seems like liberals have perfected the art of marketing half truths and lies – through ommision or commision.

    Who is watching these watchers? Obviously persons like Miss Coulter. What good does it do? NOTHING is stopping these shameless, deceptive, and manipulative liberal sociopaths. It's as if Obama liberals are the Manson family of politics; murdering the truth in order to start a liberal war of choice for crazy unrealistic or bigoted reasons.

    Why should we continue to play by the rules when liberals rig the playing field? Like a classroom of six year olds facing a murderous madman, when one deals with sociopaths one always looses. We the People of the West; whites, christians, and jews…we are loosing.

    • Maxie

      If not for voices of sanity like Coulter, Rush, & Levin we'd be saluting the Hammar & Sickel by now. The Leftist is typically an arrogant know-it-all who thinks all conservatives are irremediably stupid when it's the other way around. Keep fighting!

    • scum

      And the NRA doesn't manipulate? Are you serious here??!!!

      • RedWhiteAndJew

        Manipulate what, exactly?

  • Guest

    Maybe you can't fix stupid, and the only recourse if for gun laws to become less restrictive in conservative areas leading to much lower crime,- and then the mass murders will continue to happen in mostly liberal states or in government run liberals zones like libraries, schools, etc.

    Also remember the Trolly Square Shooting in Salt Lake City. Mall was a gun-free zone, but an off duty police officer had his anyway while out dining on the second floor of the mall for valentines day with his 7 month pregnant wife. He engaged the shooter, a teenage Muslim, while people ran to safety. Still 5 people were killed and 4 wounded before Officer Hammond could get down to the main floor where the gunman was shooting. Took him about 1 minute. He was deemed a hero for saving numerous lives.

    • RedWhiteAndJew

      IIRC, Officer Hammond was breaking the law, by carrying in the mall, as he was off duty, and the law was such, that the mall could prohibit carry on its property.

      In saying so, I do not take Officer Hammond to task. I understand why he did what he did.

      The incident brings to light several interesting observations, however:

      1) The carry of a firearm by a patron, not a security guard or on-duty cop, likely prevented more deaths.

      2) We are ready to tolerate lawbreaking by law enforcement personnel, even the violation of gun laws, but we are prepared to impose felony-level criminality upon mere subjects who do the exact same thing. In Ohio, were non-felons may carry openly, concealed carry without a license is a felony. The tail of a shirt momentarily brushing over your weapon, such that it is largely hidden from view, could land you in jail.

      3) The left is in perpetual denial over motivations for committing acts of violence such as these. In the case of this murderous muslim, at the Wikipedia page for this incident the editors will not allow the simple statement made, that witnesses heard the killer shout "allahu ackbar!" before opening fire. At the time, I attempted to contribute a passage, with citations to mainstream media sources, and it was deleted. What remains there now, is a milquetoast reference to right wing pundits who "claim" he may have said such a thing.

      3a) They tried to pin the right wing scarlet letter on Loudner and Timothy McVeigh.

      • Mary Sue

        the mall is run by idiots, that's for sure.

    • scum

      That's EXACTLY why guns should be in the hands of securty guards and authorities, and taken out of the hands of the loonies. Thanks for that unintented, but eloquent, argument for gun control.

      • RedWhiteAndJew

        Who are the loonies, scum?

        • objectivefactsmatter

          "Who are the loonies, scum?"

          The leftist scum.

      • Mary Sue

        no, you lock the loonies up in the loonie bin, you don't let them walk the streets. If they can't get guns they'll get knives or bombs.

  • Hotdigittydog

    I live in Atlanta and would not think of going to a major mall without protection. When you carry a gun you are much more aware of your surroundings and would not think twice about using it if I had to. Buy a handgun, get permitted and learn how to use it……… My wife carries one at all times. Surprise Surprise

    • scum

      Never had a problem in a mall.

      • RedWhiteAndJew

        And yet, the country is awash in guns. Why, it's the wild wild west!

        Oh wait. It's not. The lefties got that wrong.

    • Jim

      WOW, and America calls itself free. I live in Australia and wouldn't consider ever needing to take a gun anywhere. Now there is true freedom.

      • Mary Sue

        it's called the cops aren't doing their job so they pretty much HAVE to.

  • Arlie

    Sarcasm:
    Let's leave the boarders open so any kind of wmd can enter US undetected. Let's allow un-educated masses flood into US and give them free sanctuary, money and food. Let's let Saudi Arabian oil money flood into the higher education system. Let's give visas to muslims to come here for school and then don't track them because that would "discriminate". Let's fund masses of un-educated, un-wed mothers with no way out of the system. Let's fund far left propaganda text books in schools. Let's take the 10 commandments from any public or private place and vilify Judeo-Christian values and principles. Let's collapse the economy. THEN, LET'S TAKE THEIR GUNS AWAY so there becomes a huge black market for guns and only the criminals, like us, will be armed. Yeah, that's a sure path to safety and the Declaration of Independence and US Constitution will surely support this once the left stacked Supreme Court is fulfilled.

    • scum

      Don't worry, the RIGHT stacked the court years ago. Like what's happened lately?

      • RedWhiteAndJew

        Yeah, we stacked it with race-conscious "wise Latinas" and justices who draft health care laws, and the judge their constitutionality.

        Oh…wait…that wasn't us, after all.

      • Mary Sue

        With Obama in term 2 the Left will be doing all the stacking.

  • RedWhiteAndJew

    I was encouraged to hear on the radio this morning, that Ohio may be going in the direction of allowing teachers, who choose to do so, to be armed at work. An organization, police-affiliated I believe, has offered to provide free training to any teacher who steps forward to ask for it.

    The proposal states that carry on school grounds would remain a local decision, but that the state would not forbid it.

  • Jim

    Ann, I hope you read this one.

    Go to Wikipedia and do a search on China School stabbings. Please tell Americans….

    • scum

      Sh*t happens. But irrelevant in any event.

      • RedWhiteAndJew

        The guns are irrelevant. The constant here is people, and the evil that lies in the hearts of some.

      • objectivefactsmatter

        "But irrelevant in any event."

        How many people kill and murder without guns? Plenty. How many people kill with poor judgment while driving their motor vehicles?

        We need lots more laws. Just, you know, create new laws whenever my religious feelings are hurt. That's really all that matters.

  • κατεργάζομαι

    Maybe we should simply cut off the trigger fingers of all those we believe to be insane people, nu? I know a religion that would be happy to cut off fingers….for FREE!

    Autopsy photos of Adam Lanza's mother's face are sound examples that she did not know the weapons in her home posed a threat to anyone.

    If we cannot implement a rational policy that flies in the face of our irrational human limitations, then there seems to be no hope.

    I propose we ban insanity!!!!!

    • Jim

      Yes, like yours.

  • W. C. Taqiyya

    Unless the laws have been changed when I wasn’t paying attention, some jurisdictions, like Georgia, have unconcealed gun carry laws permitting the gun owner to carry his gun in malls and other public places.

    So, I will disagree slightly with Ann Coulter that only “concealed” guns would deter nutty shooters. In my opinion, carrying guns on your hip in full view of the world would also deter crime. Maybe even better.

    • RedWhiteAndJew

      I think the argument, which is not against open carry, but in favor of concealed carry, is that concealed carry deters crime against both the armed and unarmed, because the baddies can't tell one from the other.

      In order for this to be true, though, it has to be known, or at least perceived, that there is a significant level of CCW in an area. A few open carry folks would certainly punctuate awareness of such.

      • Yosemite Sam!

        Yosemite Sam! “Drop that sword varmint!”

        The Second Amendment does not differenciate between "open" and "concealed" carry, y'all!

        “Now get that flea-bitten carcass off’n my real estate!”

        • RedWhiteAndJew

          Quite true…y'all…, just saying that one should have the option, and both have merits.

  • Alex Kovnat

    @Ann: As we do on Facebook where we like someone's message but have no words we could add to make it any better:

    **LIke**

  • tagalog

    If it ever comes about that a law permitting the confiscation of firearms is passed, please remember that surplus stores sell arms containers that you can put your weapons into, that are waterproof and will allow you to bury your firearms underground for the day when you might need them.

    Also, you can buy firearms at gun shows that you don't have to sign any forms for (for now), and the government won't be able to trace them to you by any government documents.

    • scum

      Please do bury them, better than leaving them around for the kid who just shot his friend with an assault rifle about 3 days ago. On average, we have 550 accidental gun deaths every year, too.

      • tagalog

        What kind of "assault rifle" was it?

  • W. C. Taqiyya

    On another note, Ms Coulter's snide comment about how hard it is to lock up the nuts is just foolish and ignorant. It is very easy to get a person committed to the custody of the State against his will. Family members do it all the time. In most jurisdictions, they barely pay lip service to the legally mandated requirements of involuntary commitment. If the family doesn't do it, it only takes a judge and one or two shrinks to sign off on it. Not hard at all Ann, it happens all the time. To suggest otherwise is both ignorant and harmful because If they make it even easier to commit people, it will not be a pretty sight. It is not far fetched to imagine people being committed for politically incorrect thoughts. Does that sound like a solution? I guess it might if your political views are considered 'correct'. The Soviets used that tactic against political enemies all the time and it was quite effective. Coulter, pull your head out of your posterior.

    • Steveg

      It happens all the time? If that is the case, half of America would be in psycowards. Besides, the ACLU has come to the aid of these "nuts" to stay in the streets.

      • scum

        This is a half-truth. Yes, the ACLU and others (rightly) have opposed the widespread use of lobotomies, as well as illegal 'medical' testing on inmates, but de-institutionalization was just as much a product of federal budget cuts. When the feds became the primary funders of mental welfare, they were forced to reduce costs. All of this is basically beside the point, anyway, since very few of these shooters had ever done anything to warrant incarceration in the first place.

  • Raymond

    The UK banned weapons, when it happened in Scotland! What the government at the time did not tell the world ( being a Roman Catholic political party); the madman that did it, was not of the Roman Catholic faith, and over several years he was been discriminated against, by the mainstream in the community which were Roman Catholic; he wanted pay back? Not agreeing with what he did! He should have been hung by the neck, until dead. This government used the banning of weapons to the weak and poor people, because they are afraid of a revolution by these people, and had the need to make sure they would not have the use of weapons, to remove them from their corrupt power base, and remains so, to this day. That has now left the 2 per cent of the rich and powerful in charge with all the weapons that they allow each other to have and use against the poor working class; it is now the same in the USA they are using this same means to disarm their own people to keep in power; black power! You are been warned, take notice now and do not allow it to happen like we did in the UK.

    • jim

      wow raymond. Do you pay your therapist well?

  • Thomas Wells

    Samuel Colt: protecting families for 177 years.

  • Deerknocker

    The left's gun control arguments represent the triumph of emotion over facts. The left doesn't understand or like guns and no amount of factual argument will move them to realize that a gun is just a tool and can be used for good as well as evil. We have tried to ban assault weapons. That ban did nothing, primarily because what the leftist thinks is an assault weapon is a rifle that looks like a nasty military weapon but in its operation is the same as many ordinary hunting rifles. Despite the failure of that ban to accomplish anything, the left wants to reinstate it. They want to limit the number of bullets in a magazine, and somehow think a evildoer will not think of carrying more of the smaller magazines. It takes no time at all to change magazines. They swoon over gun free zones and statistics to the contrary seem to think a gunman bent on killing will avoid a gun free zone. There is no getting to these people. They are almost cult like in their refusal to view life realistically.

  • Douglas Wilson

    As a proud liberal, I may not be welcome here because of the many crazed right-wing comments I see, but I’ll try anyway.

    I think Americans are pragmatic and in general will go for the solution that works best for the least expense and burden on everyone. We don’t always get that. We’re still taking off our shoes in airports and can’t carry fluids and have to submit to searches which they don’t bother with in Israel, because they know how to do it effectively and we won’t listen. So I hope indeed that common sense prevails in the gun control discussion.

    I appreciate the idea of concealed carry gun presence, but I was intrigued by the comment above that says open carry is even better. Most of us don’t much want a society where a lot of people are walking around like the Old West packing firearms on their hips, though.

    I think what these suggestions for arming up miss is that there are places where the idea of them just rubs the wrong way — churches and elementary schools, for example. There is an argument that we just have to tolerate occasional massacres as the price of having a gun-positive culture in this country, just as we tolerate automobile deaths as the price of having cars.

    That analogy may point the way to the best way of dealing with the problem: requiring the same training and registration that owning an automobile does. On top of that, though, we need a waiting period for background checks, and perhaps some ban on weapons in households where potentially violent people live, in particular cases upon citation by appropriate officials and the right of appeal.

    Give me those things and I’m happy to let you have your assault rifle.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      "As a proud liberal, I may not be welcome here because of the many crazed right-wing comments I see, but I'll try anyway."

      You're not a typical liberal because you dared defy the contemporary thought-leaders. Given enough time to weigh the evidence, you might gravitate towards the "conservative" (not leftist) positions. I'd like to know what you consider to be those crazed right wing comments that lead you to believe that rational discussion is not welcomed.

      Some liars seem rational when you don't know the facts yourself.

      I didn't see anything you wrote as clearly unreasonable. You're welcome to comment here any time as far as I'm concerned. Respectful presentation of views will be rebutted respectfully if you happen to be duped. If you're not duped, it's hard to imagine anyone being proud to be liberal these days.

    • Mary Sue

      *facepalm*
      There. is. no. such. thing. as. an. Assault. rife.

  • http://CUBASIKASTRONO3.blogspot.com.CA peter

    THE SAD AND SHOCKING TRAGEDY IN SANDY HOOK SCHOOL

    OF NEWTOWN,CONN.

    Peter Martori

    December 18th, 2012

    When I first heard and watched -during the first hours of the drama-the news on the tragedy and the horrendous drama that shocked the continent and that has been on a daily basis all over the american and the world news, I felt as sad and overwhelmed as those parents of Newtown.

    I think that nobody would stay insensitive to the thoughts and the views of those little kids photos that we all saw during the news reports.Not only I feel sorrow and sadness but also anger for such an senseless act of hate or insesintivy by the perpetrator of such abominable massacre of innoncent little lives.

    But I also feel the same feeling for the arguments and claims

    that most people the huge majority of people, included academicians,anti-gun lobbies or groups and journalists that have been very distant of focusing in the factual point in this issue. They all,almost unmistakenly,fail to focus in the roots of the problem that AMERICA is facing now for a long time.They all focus on the GUNS and not on the persons who used them to massacre his or her fellow citizens.

    It is not the guns that killed all those people in all of these incidents through out the USA,but the individuals with a psycho problem.

    These individual cases –as we all have seen in the aftermath of the killings — they all have some sort of behavioural,psychological or some complex mental trauma that at a given minute — unpredictable for the rest of the people –

    produced these fatal massacres killing acts.

    We all must look to the roots that are the causes that are conducive to these fatal acts of unsensed motivations for such massacres of innocent lives who did not expect their lives to end in this way.

    As I have consistently seen or ocrroborated, these cases are not seen in other nations.Very seldom we hear that a case like this of Sandy Hook is all over in the news in most of European nations.

    I want to point out that in Switzerland, where there is no permanent ARMY,all the reservists keep their Armed Forces issued weapons AT HOME.And they use their weapons only every six months for a week of training each year. Switzerland can raise an Armed Force of 500,000 soldiers in less than 24 hours. However we have never heard of a massacre of the sort in Switzerland. Anothe case in point is that of Israel — a nation in almost perpetual war and under the menace of her surrounding woes.There I believe almost in every home there is one or more guns.But rare or never we hear of anything of the sort we see happening in the USA.

    If as seen or corroborated the problem and issue here is one that is mostly observed in the USA,then all those in the Academic realm of the American Universities,or even the journalists and ultimately everyone concerned,specially those who are politicizing the drame of Sandy Hook to push their agenda and lobbies anti-guns,SHOULD DIG,STUDY AND INVESTIGATE the roots causes that make America the nation where more mass murders are committed.

    In my humble opinion,the problem is caused by the socio-cultural and Ideosincracy prevailing in the american society or people.

    One of the causes for alienation, or creating complexes in an individual has its roots in the inter-relations with families, friends,neighbors and in general with society and its fellow citizens.The problem is one of culture-societal nature.

    The way of life,the family realted violence,the proliferation of graphical scenes of violence by the bias of films,TV programs,Sensationalists RED Chronics in some newspapers, the “seeding”of morbid ideas by the bias of the TERROR FILMS and ultimately the Nation’s History of wars all over the planet.

    So what I am claiming here is the study of that violent culture

    that has been pervading the american society.And this is so true that now that Christmas is approaching one can see thousands of stores all over the States selling Gi Joes,toy weapons of all sorts and kinds,and weapons are not the ones that kill,but the person who pull the triggers.But one can see those kiddies shoting at each other never having the slightest idea of what the real weapon can do. But wait…that’s until they grow older.

    I am not defending or arguing here in favor or against guns but just rying to make people aware of the facts and that any one sick enough, angry enough can ALWAYS find a mean to destroy lives in any mode, be it individualy or massively.And it does not necessarily needs guns to achieve his/her objective. One more thing we must underline here is the fact that most of these horrendous and coward killings actions have been the work of males,not females and usually in their younger ages.

    Peter Martori

    December 18th, 2012

    This link BELOW takes you to wikipedia where you can see the number of victims by ountries in similar cases of killings or murders in big numbers.

    http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anexo:Asesinos_por_n

    http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anexo:Asesinos_por_n

    • Thomas Wells

      So,guns don't kill people,people do?

  • http://twitter.com/CUBASIKASTRONO @CUBASIKASTRONO

    visit http:// CUBASIKASTRONO3.blogspot.com @CUBASIKASTRONO
    check the article onthe Sandy Hook case and the root causes for this sad inncident

  • Maxie

    As with all things, the Left never lets facts and logic interfere with its' ideological fantasies. It's the Agenda stupid and Gun Control is at the top of the list. An unarmed citizen becomes a subject. The Constitution is now used by the Left to wrap fish.

  • FRONTPGSubscr'br

    The BOTTOM LINE in all this is willingness to accept, and take, responsibility. It begins in the small areas. If you show faithfulness there, you will then, likely, be faithful in weightier matters such as, via competent and thorough instruction, includes handling a firearm safely, responsibly, and competently and, ultimately, being willing to carry that weapon in your day-to-day routine. This will require a HUGE CHANGE in our grass roots outlook, ACROSS THE BOARD … -from a 'me first', 'look out for #1', entitlement mindset to that of an 'others first', being a servant outlook.

  • Paul

    http://www.ignatius-piazza-front-sight.com/2012/1

    Syas it all. Can't be argued with… Copy and Pasta people. Dig in. Share even.

  • Paul

    One typo yes, the other- no. Eat up.

  • tuffone03

    I see a few posts about arming teachers. Do you all forget that 90% of teachers are liberals? They don’t believe ingun ownership much less usage. Besides they are too busy poisoning young minds to be concerned about their physical safety.

    • RedWhiteAndJew

      As you point out, not all are lefties. While I am not one to suggest a political test to determine who is armed, I expect the conservatives, much more than the lefties, would volunteer.

      I don't see the problem, to be frank.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      "I see a few posts about arming teachers. Do you all forget that 90% of teachers are liberals? They don't believe ingun ownership much less usage. "

      A bonus when at least some of them quit in protest.

  • TexasRider

    I suggest looking at and passing around this video on the effects of gun control by government dictate:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrPvtEVT5sk&li

    It's an hour in length and goes over many of the times government has used its power to exterminate its subjects. Remember the Jews in Nazi Germany, the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, the Communists in China, the Armenians in Turkey, and on and on.

    Many elected representatives such as Diane Feinstein have been waiting for an event much like the recent school shooting to re-introduce anti 2nd Amendment legislation. Once gone, it will never come back.

  • scum

    If the facts are so one-sided, one wonders why the NRA lobbied so hard to deprive the CDC of the $2.6 million is was going to use to implement a wide-ranging study of gun violence.

    • RedWhiteAndJew

      Uh, because they didn't want to see taxpayers' money wasted on a "study," the conclusion of which would be pre-ordained?

      Also never mind that the Center for Disease Control has a mandate to…well…control disease, crackpot hyperbole characterizing gun ownership as a disease not withstanding.

    • tagalog

      What relationship does gun violence have to the kind of things the Center for Disease Control is concerned with?

      Is someone claiming that gun violence is a disease?

    • Mary Sue

      You don't want the CDC playing with gun studies when the idiots running it have been in there since the Carter Administration (or Clinton, for that matter).

  • Arngrimur

    I guess that makes sense… one minister here in Iceland wanted to outlaw handguns(which are now, very hard to get, and only used by sport shooters) but most sane people realized that the ban would only affect legal handguns, owned by sportsmen, not those owned by criminals.

    One of the last murders here in Iceland(they happen about every 2 years) was conducted with a fire extinguisher… there are a lot more burglaries than housefires here in Iceland, so since people don't really need fire extinguishers, and they can be dangerous(especially those filled with CO2)… maybe we should ban them as well… but then again, it would be insane to ban people to protect their belongings and life from fire. How does it make sense then to make it illegal to protect one belongings and life from criminals?

    • Jim

      Idiot.

    • Mary Sue

      how do you kill a person with a fire extinguisher?

  • http://ussamerica.org/css/index.asp?fenlei=brand brand

    Hello Web site owner. My partner and i really love that writing as well as your current site all in all! The posting is very clearly written as well as very easily understandable. The Blog design is awesome as well! Would definitely be great to learn where I can obtain this. Please continue to keep up the very good work. We require even more such web owners such as you on the net and also much fewer spammers. Great friend!

  • Brent Donovan

    James Holmes has been charged with TWO counts of first degree murder for EACH of the 12 victims he killed. The sanity of James Holmes is understandably in question; but unless someone can explain to me how it is possible to kill the same individual twice, I say the sanity of the prosecuting attorney is in question.

    • Bryan

      Journalists and the general public are not horrified by nonsense, as you are. If James Holmes is acquitted, no one will blame the district attorney for sabotaging the case by filing charges that are logically impossible.